[Joint House and Senate Hearing, 110 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
CROSSING BORDERS, KEEPING CONNECTED: WOMEN, MIGRATION AND DEVELOPMENT
IN THE OSCE REGION
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND
COOPERATION IN EUROPE
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
APRIL 24, 2008
__________
Printed for the use of the
Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via http://www.csce.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
75-411 WASHINGTON : 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH COMMISSIONERS
SENATE
HOUSE
BENJAMIN CARDIN, Maryland, ALCEE HASTINGS, Florida,
Co-Chairman Chairman
RUSSELL FEINGOLD, Wisconsin LOUISE McINTOSH SLAUGHTER,
CHRISTOPHER DODD, Connecticut New York
HILARY RODHAM CLINTON, New York MIKE McINTYRE, North Carolina
JOHN KERRY, Massachusetts HILDA SOLIS, California
SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas G.K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina
GORDON SMITH, Oregon CHRISTOPHER SMITH, New Jersey
SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia ROBERT ADERHOLT, Alabama
RICHARD BURR, North Carolina JOSEPH PITTS, Pennsylvania
MIKE PENCE, Indiana
EXECUTIVE BRANCH COMMISSIONERS
DAVID KRAMER, Department of State
MARY BETH LONG, Department of Defense
DAVID STEEL BOHIGIAN, Department of Commerce
CROSSING BORDERS, KEEPING CONNECTED: WOMEN, MIGRATION AND DEVELOPMENT
IN THE OSCE REGION
----------
APRIL 24, 2008
COMMISSIONERS
Page
Hon. Alcee Hastings, Chairman, Commission on Security and
Cooperation in Europe.......................................... 01
Hon. Hilda Solis, Commissioner, Commission on Security and
Cooperation in Europe.......................................... 02
MEMBERS
Hon. Gwen Moore, a Member of Congress from the State of Wisconsin 03
Hon. Doris Matsui, a Member of Congress from the State of
California..................................................... 03
Hon. Lois Capps, a Member of Congress from the State of
California..................................................... 08
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson, a Member of Congress from the State
of Texas....................................................... 10
Hon. Diane Watson, a Member of Congress from the State of
California..................................................... 15
WITNESSES
Susan Martin, Director, Georgetown University Institute for the
Study of International Migration............................... 04
Manuel Orozco, Remittances and Development Program, Inter-
American Dialogue.............................................. 10
CROSSING BORDERS, KEEPING CONNECTED: WOMEN, MIGRATION AND DEVELOPMENT
IN THE OSCE REGION
----------
APRIL 24, 2008
Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe,
Washington, DC.
The hearing was held from 10:00 a.m. to 11:48 a.m. EST in
Room B-318, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C.,
Congressman Alcee L. Hastings, Chairman of the Commission on
Security and Cooperation in Europe, moderating.
Commissioners present: Hon. Alcee Hastings, Chairman,
Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe; and Hon.
Hilda Solis, Commissioner, Commission on Security and
Cooperation in Europe.
Members present: Hon. Diane Watson, Member of Congress from
the State of California; Hon. Gwen Moore, a Member of Congress
from the State of Wisconsin; Hon. Doris Matsui, a Member of
Congress from the State of California; Lois Capps, a Member of
Congress from the State of California; Hon. Eddie Bernice
Johnson, a Member of Congress from the State of Texas; and Hon.
Diane Watson, a Member of Congress from the State of
California.
Witnesses present: Susan Martin, Director, Georgetown
University Institute for the Study of International Migration;
and Manuel Orozco, Remittances and Development Program, Inter-
American Dialogue.
HON. ALCEE HASTINGS, CHAIRMAN, COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND
COOPERATION IN EUROPE
Mr. Hastings. We have an excellent panel with two
distinguished witnesses who are going to share with us their
knowledge of this issue. And there's much on this issue that we
need to learn in order to meet the needs of women, their
families and their home countries.
Migration is a complex issue that every country deals with.
And some countries are sending migrants abroad. Some countries
are transient points and others are the destination country.
Their status can change over time. And as we've seen to be the
case in many of the OSCE countries, particularly in Southeast
Europe, some countries are a combination of all three. I'm
going to place my full statement in the record without going
into detail, because I do want us to hear from the witnesses
and don't want a vote to interrupt us.
But I'm interested to hear from our witnesses their
suggestions on how to respond to the new generation of women
migrants. But before I turn to the panelists, I'd like to
recognize my fellow commissioner, Representative Solis.
In addition to serving as a commissioner on the Helsinki
Commission, Ms. Solis also serves on the OSCE parliamentary
assembly as special representative on migration. And as such,
her work is particularly focused on the issue of migration
within the OSCE region. She brings to that position extensive
experience on the issue of immigration here in the United
States. And I'm pleased that she's here today for this hearing.
And I'd also like to note that with Ms. Solis' active
participation, the commission is going to focus more of its
attention on the issue of immigration. And our next event is
going to be a field hearing in Los Angeles on May 9 to study
the regional impacts and opportunities for migration. And I
encourage all who are interested to attend that event.
Now, I'd like, if she would have any opening statement, Ms.
Solis to make that statement. And then I'll recognize Ms.
Moore, our colleague as well.
HON. HILDA SOLIS, COMMISSIONER, COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND
COOPERATION IN EUROPE
Ms. Solis. I want to thank our chairman and also the staff
of OSCE and our witnesses and also my good colleague and
friend, Congresswoman Gwen Moore. And I know we'll be visited
by other members of the Women's Caucus that have also learned
about this issue and want to participate.
I won't read my entire statement either. I'm very anxious
to hear what our witnesses have to say. Migration and, for
those of us who are domestic here in the states, talk about
migration and immigration. And I'm very pleased to know that
we're going to have some information given to us about some of
the positive aspects of migration.
So oftentimes we hear on the news, media, reported about
the heavy drain on our society here. We hear that also in
Europe. We hear it regarding other third world countries that
are sending many of their workers or labor force. Sometimes
it's forced upon them because of poverty, economic and
political issues. And we want to understand better what that
means here for us and our experience here in the United States.
And I do want to say that I'm very interested in hearing of
the role that women immigrants or migrants that come to this
country--play; and the fact that, in some cases, remittances,
whether they're sent from men or women here, outnumber the
foreign aid that this country sends to many of those countries
that send immigrants here to this country.
So I will respectfully submit my testimony also, my
statement for the record, Mr. Chairman. And thank you again for
this hearing.
Mr. Hastings. We're also joined with our colleague, who is
also very active in international affairs and has traveled with
us in the Helsinki Commission. And I look forward to her
traveling with us to Kazakhstan in July with my good friend
from Wisconsin, Ms. Moore--any statements you may wish to make.
And welcome Tori. We're glad you are here.
HON. GWEN MOORE, A MEMBER OF CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF
WISCONSIN
Ms. Moore. Yes, Tori is here from Memphis, Tennessee with
Girls, Inc. And this is a great way to train women for
leadership roles, to have them come and spend the day with the
members of Congress. I just want to commend the president of
the Helsinki Commission, Mr. Hastings, for his outstanding
stewardship. He really has focused on gender equality and
gender issues throughout his stewardship, not only as the
president of the Helsinki Commission, but as a past president
of OSCE.
And, of course, my dear colleague, Hilda Solis--her vice
chairmanship of Human Needs Committee of the OSCE. I want to
thank them for really calling this briefing, this hearing,
together today. I'm very interested in OSCE. And I have, of
course, traveled with them. More particularly, I'm a member of
the financial services committee. And I have been appointed as
part of the parliamentary network on the World Bank.
And so I am very, very interested in hearing from you what
the impact of international migration remittances have, not
only on issues such as brain drain, or perhaps strain from
receiving companies--but what the World Bank research has shown
about the spurring of development from female migration--very
interested in hearing any particular information that you might
have regarding the economics of migration.
Thanks to you again for inviting me.
Mr. Hastings. Thank you very much, Congresswoman Moore. My
good friend and colleague from the Rules Committee has joined
us. And she has a continuing interest in these matters. And as
our witnesses can see, you know, you will see some other
members come and go, a number of them have been involved in
women's issues.
But let me ask Doris Matsui if she would offer any comment
at this time.
HON. DORIS MATSUI, A MEMBER OF CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA
Ms. Matsui. Thank you very much, Chairman Hastings. I enjoy
serving with him on the Rules Committee. He sits about right
there in relationship to me. And he's just absolutely
wonderful, and also Congresswoman Solis and Congresswoman
Moore. I mean, we travel together, and we have bonded together
on many of these issues.
I want to thank you very much for being here today too,
both of you. Women migrants have become very of interest to me,
because as we study women around the world, we realize that
lawmakers really must look at the economic opportunities in
countries regarding women as well as work trends and family
development. Women seem to be the key to a lot of this.
And today's hearing is really an opportunity for us in
Congress to present the American public with true life stories
on the issues of women in other countries. And during a time in
this nation's history that has yielded, sort of, somewhat
unfortunately visceral reactions, responses to incidences in
our own country, it's important for us to investigate the
trends and economic reasons behind women and migration and
remittances.
And I know the World Bank and others have other witnesses
we'll hear from shortly are analyzing how gender plays a role
in dynamics and determinants of international migration. And
they're also uncovering the economic circumstances that lead to
migrant workers.
In many developing countries, remittance flows make up the
second largest source of external financing. And that's coming.
More and more people are beginning to understand this. And it
raises many important policy questions for all of us.
And as Congress and other lawmakers continue to delve into
issues surrounding migrants and gender differences in
migration, we have the opportunity to develop policy based on
implications for growth and welfare in both origin and
destination countries.
And today's hearing really gives us a good forum to ask the
kind of questions necessary to understand and deign policies
for the migration of women. And I look forward to hearing from
you. And I thank Chairman Hastings for putting together this
hearing today.
Mr. Hastings. Thank you very much, Ms. Matsui, Ms. Solis
and Ms. Moore. I'd like to turn now to our witnesses. And
joining us today is Dr. Susan Martin, director of the Institute
for the Study of International Migration and Georgetown
University, and Dr. Manuel Orozco, with the Remittances and
Development Program at the Inter-American Dialogue. We've
distributed their biographies. And if the audience would pick
them up at the table, it would be appreciated. But in the
interests of time, I'm not going to read them.
As a backdrop before beginning with you, Dr. Martin, I just
with to add to the record what is not a direct relationship,
but it demonstrates among other things the attitudes that are
extant here in the Congress. And that would be yesterday's
inaction of the United States Senate on disparity as it
pertains to women. I just would like to add my voice as one
that was sorely disappointed.
So Dr. Martin, if you would begin.
SUSAN MARTIN, DIRECTOR, GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE FOR THE
STUDY OF INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION
Ms. Martin. Thank you. Thank you for this opportunity to
testify this morning about the situation of women migrants in
the region covered by the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe. I have a longer statement that I'd like
to have added to the record. Thank you.
Policy makers throughout the world, including in the OSCE
region, are seeking to make migration a win-win-win situation--
a win for host countries, destination countries; a win for the
source countries, origin of migrants; and of course a win for
the migrants themselves. In thinking through strategies to
increase the benefits of migration in this win-win-win
situation, and also to deal with some of the negative
consequences of migration, it's important to keep the gender
dimension in mind.
More women are migrating from south to north. And the
highest proportion of women migrants is in the OSCE region.
Women migrants now represent 53.4 percent of the total migrant
population in Europe. And the U.S. figures, or North American
figures, are similar. Gender perspective is essential to
understand both the causes and consequences of international
migration. Gender and equality can be a powerful factor in
precipitating migration, particularly when women have economic,
political and social expectations that actual opportunities at
home can't meet.
Globalization has increased knowledge of options within and
outside of home countries. And it's opened a range of new
opportunities for women who want to leave their homes. However,
globalization has also failed to live up to its potential,
leaving women throughout the world in poverty and without
economic, social or political rights.
In such cases, migration may be the best or indeed the only
way out of a desperate situation for many women. The migration
experience is also highly gendered, particularly in
relationship to social and family relationships and employment
experiences. Traditionally, most women migrate through family
reunification channels. They migrate to join spouses and
children who have already migrated.
When such migration is the only route for women to take, it
often leads to fraud and abuse, where they seek marriage
opportunities, because it's the way of finding better
opportunities. And of course, having migrated, they may find it
very difficult to leave abusive situations where their husband
is their only link to remaining in legal status.
Today, though, more women are migrating on their own as
principal wage earners, not just following to join their
husbands. Their experience is gendered as well. They tend to
take jobs in very familiar female occupations, whether it's as
domestic workers, nurses, teachers. They tend to follow the
gender, the gender prospects and terms of employment.
Women who migrate, another aspect of the gendered
experience, is that they often find themselves at risk of
gender-based violence and exploitation. Whether labor migrants,
family migrants, trafficking victims or refugees, they face the
double problem of being female and being foreign. In addition,
it's important to keep in mind that gender does not operate in
isolation from race, ethnicity and religion. Since many migrant
women differ from the host population in these respects, they
may face additional discrimination based not only on being
foreign, being women, but also of a different race, religion or
ethnicity.
The migration experience, though, can also be positive.
It's not all a negative process. Migration can be an empowering
experience for women who have the opportunity to do things upon
migration that they couldn't do at home. Even a migration of
their spouses, of their husbands, can be empowering as they are
left behind to operate, make decisions, and decide how
resources will be utilized and gaining empowerment as a result
of this process.
In other respects, though, migration can reinforce
traditional gender roles, because migration is a very complex
process. Often women are expected to preserve cultural and
religious norms after migration. And they're supposed to be
preserving the family values of the societies from which they
come. Very often immigration rules reinforce this process,
particularly again through the family reunification process,
when their status is so much linked to their husband's status
or their children's status.
It's important, though, to note that changing gender roles
in destination countries can also influence migration. I
posited, amongst other experts, that were going to be seeing a
huge increase in migration pressures in the years ahead, and
particularly related to female migration. As our societies age,
as more of us in my generation enter retirement age require
health care services, social care to help with work at home,
the demand for female migrants to fill these jobs are going to
be increasing. Of course, as more younger women enter the job
market, the demand for daycare, child care services also
increases. Women tend to provide these services.
Migration also has an effect, as some of the opening
statements said, on the development of the source country. It
isn't only an impact on the destination country. It happens
very often through remittances. But it's important to keep in
mind that the connections between migration and development are
a two-way connection. Underdevelopment causes migration.
Migration can influence the development process. It operates in
both directions.
In the best case scenario, migration should be voluntary.
And women, particularly migrants in general, should not have to
migrate as a result of deepening economic or political
pressures at home. They should be migrating because it's their
choice, and of course the choice of the destination country, so
that they operate through legal channels.
There's been a lot of attention to the economic factors
causing migration. There's less attention, though, in dealing
with stay-at-home development programs to gender roles and
relationships in gender equality. And I think that has to be
taken into account.
Now, a pernicious form of migration for women, who were
denied rights and denied economic opportunities, is trafficking
in persons--trafficking where they--through coercion and
deception are forced into migrating in a way in which they will
be exploited, either for forced labor or for sexual
exploitation.
The international regime for addressing trafficking is
developing--and I must admit that the OSCE, I think, has one of
the best institutional structures in place now amongst
international and regional organizations for addressing
trafficking. And this is an area, where it needs to be
applauded in terms of the steps already taken, but certainly
requires more resources, more attention from the commissioners'
member states as to what it is doing in this particular area.
So even though economic development and human social
development is the best long-term solution to migration,
migration is likely to continue certainly for the short to
medium term. And in fact economic development theory says can
increase migration as people have more resources, more
knowledge, and more opportunities to move.
So there we get into the migration as a support for
development issues. And here women play a particular role. I'll
let my colleague, Manuel Orozco, talk a bit more about
remittances, because my testimony relies on some of the
research he and my other colleagues have done.
But I think it's also important to look at the broader way
in which diasporas can support development. Hometown
associations are very important as a way of bringing resources
back to their home communities. Too often, though, women
migrants are shut out of those hometown associations. They
don't have the means by which they can influence decisions
about how to spend the money that's being spent back home. And
since we know that women have a predisposition to spend money
on health, education, things that benefit human development,
it's important that they get attention, and that they have an
opportunity.
Let me conclude with a few recommendations that I state in
my testimony as to ways that the United States and other
destination countries in the OSCE region can perhaps help to
stimulate the win-win-win situation. Certainly, the U.S. should
be supporting programs and policies to empower women migrants
and those left behind by male migrants to participate actively
in the decisions that affect them and their families, including
support for voluntary organizations of women migrants, so they
can participate in this process.
Improvements are certainly needed in protection of migrant
women's rights and safety, also in improving their socio-
economic situation to avoid the exploitation that too often
accompanies migration. Policies to help reduce the cost of
remittance transfers, so more money actually end up with
families. The important other factor, truth in transfer
policies, so people know what they're actually sending, what
will be received.
Programs are needed to stimulate diaspora contributions to
economic, social, education, health, political, development and
home countries. So is the identification of ways to better
promote stay-at-home developments, so people can migrate by
choice not necessity--particularly looking at helping women to
gain economic opportunities, education, health care, other
services, legal rights, protection from violence at home. And
then improvements in data collection. Unfortunately, we don't
have good sex and age segregated data on emigration or
immigration. That makes it hard to target policies and programs
at women migrants.
There are numerous international and regional fora in which
these issues are being discussed. OSCE is one of them. The U.S.
participates very actively in a number of regional fora. And I
would urge that that process continue. There is growing,
though, international multilateral discussion of migration
issues, particularly through the Global Forum on Migration and
Development, a state-owned process trying to get governments to
talk about how they can cooperate, source, transit, destination
countries.
U.S. so far has been missing an action from that process
that we've not taken a very active stance as a government, even
though this is a governmental process that I think holds a lot
of promise for having a real dialogue with the source countries
about how to best manage migration. And I would hope that the
U.S. could start to become much more actively engaged in all of
the international discussions on this important issue. Thank
you.
Mr. Hastings. Dr. Martin, thank you. And Dr. Orozco, I hope
you will all permit, I know we've been joined by two of our
colleagues. And I do know that Ms. Capps has to leave. But I
would like to hear from her. And I don't know, Ms. Johnson may
well have to as well. But let me if she has anything that she
would wish to say at this time. My very good friend and
colleague from California, the chair of the bipartisan Women's
Caucus, Lois Capps.
HON. LOIS CAPPS, A MEMBER OF CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA
Ms. Capps. Thank you, Chairman Hastings, for holding this
very important hearing. And I want to thank Congresswoman Solis
for your great work. I've been hearing about some meetings that
you've been having in your particular representation on
migration within the commission. This is a very timely hearing.
And I much appreciated Dr. Martin's remarks. And I know that
Dr. Orozco will be a very instrumental in educating us as to
the good side and the hard side to what this topic addresses
for us.
I think you can tell, Chairman, that holding this hearing
evoked a strong response from the Women's Caucus in terms of
our membership. We who are here representing, not only women in
our congressional districts, but as women are very sensitive to
how migration affects women and, of course, their families.
It goes without saying that, when we talk about women,
there's a sort of stereotype. You talked about women who are
wage-earners. But it's often the man of the household is sent
first, at least, and finds the way and sends back those
remittances. And it's left to the woman to hold the family
together. And then, there's oftentimes--I'm now talking about
my personal experience. And all of us have our anecdotal
experiences with this topic in our congressional districts.
And over the many years, I was a public health nurse in my
community. I became very closely involved in the migration
patterns of families who--and we've even structured in Southern
California our school year around certain migration patterns;
because oftentimes it's a back and forth for economic reasons
and familial reasons.
I think a signal issue in terms of my experiences,
particularly to the south of our border, for those families
that I've become acquainted with is the disparate family, the
separated family. And that the particular challenges that holds
for a woman who, in the interest of unification, oftentimes
embarks on risky behaviors and decision making, because she has
that overarching drive that can't be quelled to have the family
united.
And that impacts our school calendar. It impact employment.
It impacts transportation and legality in terms of crossing.
There are so many issues of safety and of family unity, which
is so core to what we define as being American. I mean, these
are very fraught issues.
And yet, it's so ripe with opportunity for us to address
this in a good way. Our immigration policies, as I think
everyone would know, are no up-to-date. That's the nicest way I
can say that. And it comes down to bear so dramatically on the
life of the women that we all know from our experiences at
home. And seen as a totality, it has tremendous impact on this
country.
It's become politicized in quite negative ways that are
with very strong consequences to, again, some of our
fundamental ways of treating one another in terms of justice
and fairness and compassion as a nation. So we are being put to
the test.
And yet it comes down to the state I represent--and there
are a couple of us here now. Ms. Matsui was here earlier--is
one of the younger states of the nation. But we know very
dramatically the strong role migration has played on the
strength and the development and the advancement of our state.
There's just evidence everywhere, with new work forces as each
generation comes along, of extremely hardworking people who
have sacrificed and are sacrificing a great deal to be in this
country.
Almost all of us have immigrants in our family histories.
And you know that those first generation of people to come to
this country are the reason we have succeeded as a nation in so
many ways, because of hard work, determination, and that
American dream that no one knows more clearly than someone who
is yearning to come, or someone who has come, and now seeks
very intently on fulfilling their dreams in this country.
And I want to say how much I appreciate the positive role
that migrant families have played. I represent an agricultural
district. And it's certainly in that arena. I have a lot of
tourism in my district. I know that that that's very dependent
on certain group of people who will do those kinds of long and
very physically demanding jobs that go undone without that.
There's a need on the part of this country to fix and
policies and to have the right kind of people here. But respect
for the institutions that we have--that's another final point
that I wanted to make is that, in some ways, a migrant woman
carries within her soul and heart, for the sake of her family
and for the dreams that she has, a tremendous desire to honor
and respect the local teachers that her kids go to school to
study under, the enormous respect with which the privileges of
being a part of our society hold, and how that is passed on.
And I just hope we honor that. And I know we are in this
discussion. But we'll find ways to sustain that attribute, that
positive contribution that women make in this area. I think the
migrant woman is the one who carries the desires and also
brings with her from the country of origin the culture, the
values, the traditions. This is the role that the woman plays
in transmitting that to the next generation within the wider
culture, so that we have the enormous richness of culture that
come also with these women.
So I'm going to stop now. I've been joined by colleagues.
It's wonderful to see. I appreciate very much again, Mr.
Chairman, that you're holding this hearing.
Mr. Hastings. Thank you very much, Ms. Capps. I was awfully
glad that Commissioner McIntyre joined us. I was beginning to
feel intimidated--and also Commissioner Diane Watson from
California. I had said earlier that I would hear from
Congresswoman Johnson, my classmate, good friend and colleague
from Texas. And Mike, if you and Ms. Watson don't mind, then I
would like to hear from Dr. Orozco. And then we will come to
you. All right. Ms. Johnson.
HON. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, A MEMBER OF CONGRESS FROM THE STATE
OF TEXAS
Ms. Johnson. Thank you very much, Congressman Hastings. And
let me express my appreciation for you and Ms. Solis for having
this hearing and with your continuing leadership. Women really
coming to almost any country--because the U.N. has had reports
as well are really very vulnerable to mistreatment. Just
recently, there was a Latino woman held for four days in jail
in Arkansas without food or water or anything. They just forgot
they locked her up.
And I think that we need to really get more attention. The
International Labor Organization estimates that there are
between 80 million and 100 million migrant workers
internationally. And about half of that population will be
women. And it doesn't take us much to see many of them. They
take care of children. They clean houses and any other type of
job they can get to work to try to keep families together. And
generally speaking, I think that anyone will have to
acknowledge that they have been a positive force in this
country. And it also falls to the independence, self-confidence
and economic status for many women coming under more fair
circumstances.
They cannot communicate in their own language for the host
country, and are documented, and lack adequate contracts. And
that's what makes them so vulnerable. I have read about women
being practically enslaved in homes as housekeepers and
babysitters, which we have to become more sensitive to, to make
sure that we live up to our own constitution of fairness. And
many contend that payments and investments contribute to
migrant women's poverty reduction. But they're almost held
hostage in some situations. And you wonder if they're getting
paid at all.
So I thank you for coming as witnesses. And I look forward
to hearing the testimony of Mr. Orozco. We need to know from
you--and Ms. Solis and Mr. Hastings and all might know this
already--but we need to know what actions by the Congress will
help alleviate these challenges for women migrants; because I
think women are much more vulnerable to mistreatment when they
come.
Thank you very much, Mr. Hastings.
Mr. Hastings. Thank you very much, Ms. Johnson. And Dr.
Orozco, thank you for your patience. I think you can tell, by
the interest shown from the membership that this is an issue of
substantial import to those of us here in Congress. Dr. Orozco.
MANUEL OROZCO, REMITTANCES AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM, INTER-
AMERICAN DIALOGUE
Mr. Orozco. Thank you very much for inviting me to testify
before you. And actually, I'm very motivated to see the
interest and the concern over this issue and having a balanced
approach also to this. But only look at women as the negative
effects of migration, but look at the whole balance, the whole
picture; and have an open perspective about the broader issues,
especially relating to gender.
There is no question that the member countries of the OSCE
have reliance in the country of migration, especially over the
past 20 years. And this reliance is related to a number of
factors. But particularly it has to do with some of the slow
transition of economic growth of many countries who are now
members of the Commonwealth of Independent States; but also is
related to the increase in economic growth in the Russian
economy associated also with the significantly sharp
demographic changes that has happened in Russia simultaneously.
That has changed different patterns of international migration.
At the same time, there is another process that is
happening, which is that there is a global feminization of low-
cost labor that has had significant implications in the demand
for foreign labor from different countries in the OSCE region.
I will focus my testimony on issues regarding women
migration and remittances, particularly in Central Asia, the
South Caucasus and Moldova, which are places where I have
conducted extensive field work on these issues of migration and
remittances. And I will offer some recommendations on
developing policy focusing on how to leverage remittances in
relationship to gender an economic development in general.
What I'd like to share with you is five different points.
One is just general patterns of migration in the OSCE
countries. Second, look at the relationship between migration
and gender in particular relating to what determinants have
shaped these processes; then pay attention to female migrants
and remittances, then to female remittance recipients in some
of these countries; and finally make some policy
recommendations, particularly on health and education and on
financial access on the other hand.
On the issue of migration, what you definitely see is that
about a quarter of the world's migrants are actually in the
OSCE member countries. And that's basically about 50 million
migrants are OSCE member countries. And 40 million of these are
basically migrants in developing countries from this region,
the OSCE region.
Just looking at Central Asia and the South Caucasus alone,
you have 70 million migrants, the majority of which, over 60
percent, goes permanently to Russia. A smaller percentage goes
to Kazakhstan. And then you have another percentage that goes
to Western Europe. For example, with people from Moldova, 30
percent of Moldovan migrants are going to Italy. And there are
as many women as men migrating to Italy.
Unlike migration to Russia, the majority of migrants going
there are predominantly males. It's basically three-quarters of
migrants are males. And 25 percent are women. One reason for
that is because of the nature of the economic development
happening in Russian at this point. There is a strong reliance
on construction work, which is predominantly gender-based to a
large extent where they demand more male labor than female
labor in construction or even gas industries. But you see the
25 percent of migrant women in Russia; these are predominantly
working in the service industry and also in the informal
economy. If you go to Moscow, for example, you will see many
women in the street as street vendors, particularly people from
Kurdistan and Tajikistan.
Another important aspect is that another reason why there
is more male migration to Russia, for example, from these
countries in particular, not to Western Europe--it has to do
with the economic conditions in these countries. These are
highly rural societies. The higher rural composition of a
country is, the lower the female migration will be. And this
has to do with cultural patterns that exist in a society, but
also to issues relating to the feminization of labor in
agrarian societies.
And at the same time, this relates to income. In places
where there is lower income, you will have lower migration. The
poor cannot migrate. And in general, we know that women are
mostly low-wage earners than men. No matter whether they have
the same job, they will still earn less than men. So those are
some of the terminance that explain some of the migration
patterns going within the OSCE to Russia in particular.
Now, in terms of the broader patterns of remitting, for
example, we estimate that remittances of migrants from the OSCE
countries amounts about $55 billion. And just to Central Asia,
especially for countries the Caucasus, Azerbaijan, Armenia,
Kurdistan, Tajikistan and Georgia--are receiving $10 billion in
remittances, and Moldova.
This is not a small amount of money, especially when we're
talking about some of the poorest countries in the world--
Tajikistan, Moldova, Kurdistan, Azerbaijan paradoxically. One
of the richest countries in oil is also among the poorest
countries in the world. There are also countries paradoxically
where U.S. cooperation has a strong presence. The Millennium
Challenge Corporation is in Armenia, in Kurdistan, in Moldova,
among other countries in this region.
But that $10 billion basically, 20 percent of that is
coming from remittances transferred by female migrants. Now,
female migrants do remit less than men. The average amount
remitted by a migrant is about $1,500 a year. It's much less
than, for example, what a migrant in the United States is
remitting to Latin American or Asia. But this is relative to
the income conditions of the migrant, but also to the cost of
living in their home countries. Cost of living in places like
Azerbaijan or Tajikistan is much lower than in Latin America.
But the main reason why they remit less, it has to do
because they earn less money. Construction work pays more, pays
better than service work in the informal economy. There is also
another reason, which is that some of the female migrants are
already married in the host country, whose husbands might be
native Russian citizens or migrants themselves. But their
obligations are more dispersed. And they have to redistribute
their resources. The earnings they receive are spent
differently than the earnings men do.
So, for example, most males in Russia, migrant males, have
spouses back home. And they also have their children back home.
So they have higher responsibilities in terms of the amount
that they need to send. Whereas the woman migrant is likely to
have their children in Russia and their spouses also in Russia.
When we look at the people who receive remittances, we
basically learn that 60 percent of remittance recipients are
women. And this is a figure based on service we have done in
these countries; but at the same time might be a contestable
figure, that it might have to do with gender dynamics happening
in these countries. Female remittance recipients are receiving
less than men. They receive about 20 percent less than men do,
even though they have to manage the same type of household size
than men do.
But there is another characteristic that I think is
important to keep in mind when it comes to these issues of
gender and migration. And it's that when men migrate, and they
are married, and they leave their spouses behind, in many cases
the women move into the in-laws' homes. And they lose a
significant portion of their independence that they have as
they were in their own households. And one of the losses of
this independence is that they are no longer the household
head.
In these societies, the head of the household is generally
accepted to be the oldest man in the house. And this can be
probably a retired person who has no job, in fact no roles in
managing the household. But he is perceived to be the head of
the household. And he might be the person receiving remittances
and may decide how much to give to the woman to administer the
money.
It's not a pattern, but it is something that happens on a
regular basis among a percentage of the population that
receives remittances and are women. That loss of independence
is a policy issue that one needs to keep into consideration.
But it's a difficult one to also provide a solution, because it
might inflict on issues of privacy within the household.
A third issue that deals with the work we have been doing
on remittances and development focuses on the fact that the
women remittance recipients have much less financial access
than men do. In most of these countries, financial access is
plainly low. Less than 20 percent of people in Central Asia or
the Caucasus have access to a bank account.
Remittance recipients have a slightly higher access, about
25 percent, and that's because the money allows them to accrue
savings and eventually mobilize them into financial
institutions. But when it comes to women, even though they
might be the larger remittance recipient proportion, they do
not have as much access to banking institutions as men do.
And that poses another problem of a policy nature in the
issue of economic development. In Tajikistan, for example, only
5 percent of men have bank accounts. And when it comes to
women, it's 3 percent. In Kurdistan, it's about 20 percent for
women and 30 percent for men. And the same goes for Armenia and
Moldova. So there is a significant disparity about this. There
is an unconventional ability between the percent of remittance
recipients who are women and the percent of women who have bank
accounts.
So I want to now finish with some policy recommendations
dealing with these challenges that we face. One important one
is that, from the perspective of the Helsinki Commission,
especially from the U.S. Congress side, I think we must
encourage the development institutions working in those
countries to integrate migration as part of the agenda. This is
a very important issue, because it's largely neglected.
And especially when we're talking about U.S. government
cooperation, USAID, the Millennium Challenge Corporation in
particular are two major developing institutions that play an
important role in countries like Armenia, Moldova, Kurdistan,
Tajikistan, et cetera. And yet, in none of these places there
is a strategy, much less an agenda, in linking remittances and
leveraging those flows for development, and much less on gender
issues, even though everybody is aware that there is a dynamic
relating to the issues, gender migration and remittance.
And definitely, in most of these countries--for example, in
Moldova--30 percent of the country's GDP is coming from
remittances. Same thing goes with Armenia. There is a
significant dependence on this, because there is less labor
migration. So that's one issue.
Another issue is that, from the more operational side of
development policy, it's important that cooperation focuses on
health and education projects for female remittance
recipients--and not just for female remittance recipients, it's
an issue that applies for everyone. But health and education
issues matter for migrants.
Migrants want to improve the health and education of their
children. And they will be interested, for example, in
investing in the scholarship funds and medical insurance for
their relatives. The remittance recipient is a person over 50
years of age in most cases. So they are facing more health
challenges than a younger person. And yet, there is no health
facility accessible in most of these countries that is
affordable or efficient.
Then there are issues on financial access. And there, I
propose four major strategies that can be operational at the
level of economic development policy--one dealing with getting
greater access to remittance recipients into the banking
system. The regulatory environment in most of these countries
in the OSCE region do not allow anybody but banks to pay, to
make money transfers.
So if you go, for example, here to Western Union to remit
money to Armenia or to Moldova, the recipient has to pick up
the remittance and the bank. Yet, the bank does not offer any
financial intermediation. And we have learned that the assets
in cash that these people hold among those who receive
remittances is about $1,000. But it's mostly kept informally.
So access to the banking institutions is essential.
Another important issue is to support microfinance
institutions in rural areas, where at least half of remittances
go. This is a different pattern that goes, for example, in
Latin America, where only 40 percent of remittance go to rural
areas. In OSCE countries, it's a higher percentage that goes
there. Microfinance institutions have the ability to work
directly with clients who are remittance recipients. Therefore
providing them technical assistance to work on designing
financial products to those people is essential.
The third issue is financial education. We have learned
that financial education does work. It increases people's
ability to manage their money, which provides the means for
financial independence. But also it allows them to save more
efficiently. We developed a pilot project that is about to
finalize in Moldova on financial education. And the results
have been quite successful in the fact that people are opening
bank accounts. But more importantly is that they are making the
arithmetic of managing their finances and understanding how to
integrate their remittance earnings with the overall earnings,
to calculate that 70 percent of their earnings are coming from
foreign labor from their relatives.
And finally, another issue to operationalize at the
development level is to promote the introduction of new
technologies in rural areas for money transfers. And this
specifically deals with mobile transfers. And expanding mobile
technology into rural areas will have a definite effect in
economic development in these countries.
And I thank you for allowing me to speak. Thank you very
much.
Mr. Hastings. Thank you Dr. Orozco. I'd like to have Ms.
Watson make any comments she may wish, and then Commissioner
McIntyre, and then I'll go to Ms. Solis for questions.
HON. DIANE WATSON, A MEMBER OF CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA
Ms. Watson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for having us join
this commission. And I want to thank the witnesses for being
here. The question arises--and I was just reading your
biography, Dr. Martin, is that there seems to be a separation
or a division between women who migrate and women who are
refugees.
And I am concerned now about the great number of women who
have left war zones and particularly, of course, Iraq. I
understand there are 2.6 million people that have migrated into
the surrounding states. There's a percentage. And reading
through the information here--49.6 percent of those who migrate
are women. And do you see a difference in those who become
refugees?
And the other issue I want to raise, and I'll just throw it
all out there now, with Dr. Orozco is in the state of
California, and in this country as a whole, the big issue is on
illegal immigration. And California, many of the migrants are
being accused--women in particular are coming across the border
having their children, pregnant women having their children.
And so they then become citizens of the United States.
I wish you would comment, Dr. Martin, on the refugee issue.
And I wish you would comment, Dr. Orozco, on what your studies
show in terms of illegal migration and the reasons and factors
and the consequences.
Mr. Hastings. Why don't you go ahead, Dr. Martin, and Dr.
Orozco.
Ms. Martin. Yes. I'm glad that you did ask about refugee
women, because that is another component, which I didn't
address in my testimony. But I've written extensively on
refugee women's issues.
We estimate that about 75 percent to 80 percent of the
world's refugees are women and their dependent children. And
there's a disproportionately high share of women-headed
households amongst those who are displaced as a result of
conflict. There's some research now that indicates that people
in effect go as far as their resources will take them. And a
much larger share of those who flee conflict now are internally
displaced. They can't get across international borders. And
therefore they don't become officially refugees.
And we think that both socioeconomic status but also gender
affect that process. So women are less likely to be able to
find a safe refuge in the context of conflict than men are. If
you look at the proportion of asylum seekers in the U.S. and
Europe and Australia, wealthier countries, a much higher
proportion are men. They have the resources, both financial and
contacts. And their families are often pushing for them to get
as far away from the conflict then as possible. So there's a
huge gender disparity.
Unfortunately for most refugee and displaced women, getting
to a refugee or a displaced persons' camp doesn't signify
safety--that the conflict spills over into where they are. I've
interviewed many women in Kenya, in Burundi and other--in
Somalia, other places in Africa as well as in Latin America and
Asia--for whom something as simple as collecting firewood or
water is a risk to life and limb; that the rape rates amongst
women who are going out--and over time, because there's no
distribution of firewood in most refugee situations, they may
have to go 20, 30 kilometers outside of the camp. That puts
them at high level of risk.
One of the simplest things that could happen is if donors
provided financing for firewood distribution, fuel
distributions in refugee contexts. It's expensive. And in most
cases, if it's a choice between buying food or buying firewood,
aid agencies of course buy the food. But if women are going to
be raped or killed trying to get the firewood to cook the food,
it's a must needed victory in terms of that aid.
Ms. Watson. What about the children then?
Ms. Martin. Children, 50 percent or more of the refugees
are children under the age of 18; problems in terms of access
to health care, access to education; big strides in trying to
at least get to primary education. It's happened over the last
20 years; very limited access to secondary education for any
children, and almost no access to employment after being able
to be educated.
Another problem that still remains terrible for children is
either forced recruitment into the military out of either the
official or the insurgencies; or for young girls being
trafficked, particularly into sexual exploitative situations.
My first experience with that was 20 years ago on the Thai-
Cambodian border, in which every Sunday, when the aid agencies
were out of the camp, the brothel owners were in the camp
rounding up girls to bring to Bangkok. And this happens
throughout the world. So major problems for children.
Mr. Hastings. Dr. Orozco.
Mr. Orozco. Thank you. Illegal migration is a pattern that
happens all over the world. And we looked at, for example,
these citizens from CIS countries going to Russia. And they
have as much irregular presence as there is in the United
States; same thing in Western Europe and elsewhere in the
world. What it does reflect is rather a reality which is a lack
of commensurability between public policy and global demand for
foreign labor and demographic shifts in the industrialized
economy.
And to some extent, the inability perhaps of politicians to
come to terms if we need to find a balance between the issues
that come across. With regard to the question on the issues of
women crossing borders and having babies to get their
citizenship, I think that's predominantly an anecdotal pattern
or explanation.
And to tell you the truth, it's very crude and short-
sighted approach; because you can cross the border and have you
baby. That doesn't mean that is going to make him automatically
a U.S. citizen, or a citizen of Russia or anywhere else. And
the cost of investing in that child to get your access to the
benefits that the polity will provide you are not going to
outweigh the challenges of dealing with that.
And, you know, we've seen many women who are deported, even
though their children are U.S. citizens. And so I think it's
more an anecdotal situation. I think the main issue is that
illegal migration is a reality that we're having a hard time to
cope with. And we need to come with answers that deal with
immigration reform issues, legalization of people, as well as
deportation and streamlining of the process. But every single
county in the world, not just in the United States, is dealing
exactly with the same issue.
Ms. Watson. May I have one more comment?
Mr. Hastings. Sure.
Ms. Watson. Just as a follow-up. In listening to the two of
you, my concerns are do women and their children return home?
What is the typical amount of time they stay as a migrant
somewhere else? And under what conditions can they go back home
and continue a normal life? And I'll just end by saying this is
something that the Helsinki Commission needs to look at.
You know, what will stabilize these women and their
children. Most of them have children. We were in Chad--250,000
refugees, most of them women and children with blank looks in
their eyes. And they're trying to do some schooling. But my
concern is once they migrate, legally or illegally or whatever
the conditions are that force them to do that, how soon do they
return, if they return, under what condition? And how can we
help them?
Ms. Martin. If I could start, I think that's a very
variable process. I think there are a lot of people who migrate
temporarily or keep circulated return home.
Ms. Watson. Have you done much research that way?
Ms. Martin. The research it's not very good on return
patterns. For the U.S., for example, we have immigration data.
We don't have emigration data. We don't know who leaves and how
long it's been since they leave. One of my colleagues has been
doing estimations for what that period of stay is.
And it varies tremendously depending on whether--and the
biggest factor is children, that historically it's been a
tendency that migrants will return within five years, if
they're going to return at all, or after retirement. But as
soon as they have children in the school system, they're here.
And they're likely to remain permanently or at least until
retirement age. And that's a pattern we've seen throughout
history.
I want to add a thing to what Manuel said. When I directed
the Commission on Immigration Reform, we looked very much into
this issue of whether women were crossing to have babies for
citizenship. And I agree very much with his assessment, because
what we found was that women were here and therefore had
babies, not that women were pregnant and therefore came here to
have their babies. They came for a variety of other reasons.
But it's been human nature, a fair number had children.
Ms. Watson. That anecdote is used in California all the
time. You can verify it. And it's very troubling, because I
don't see that. And in our schools, of course, there's been a
growth in the migrant children. But I don't see that. We hear
it all the time. You know, that's a big issue in this country.
It's a big issue in California. And we have not agreed on how
to deal with it. So it's fair to all.
But I would like, as you go back and report, that we really
take a look on how do we return people to the most optimum--
women particularly and their children--if return is optimal. So
anyway, that's something that we can follow up on.
Mr. Hastings. Thank you, Ms. Watson. Ms. Solis.
Ms. Solis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to thank the
members of the Women's Caucus and women who are here on the
dais with us, members of Congress; because I think it really
does symbolize that we do care very deeply. This is such a
complex issue. I think we're almost talking about two different
scenarios. One is what's happening with OSCE, European
countries and Central Asia, Russia. And then also what our
experience is here domestically.
And there are a little different. And I want to touch and
try to get your response from that. I know in the E.U. right
now, there are some states or countries that have attempted to
implement very specified migration. For example in Spain, they
will allow women to come in, low-skilled women, with the idea
that they'll go back home, because their children don't come
with them. So they are on a restricted kind of a plan.
And I want to know if Dr. Orozco or Dr. Martin, you could
touch on, you know, what you've learned from that. There's also
this notion about a blue card, which is our equivalent to the
H-1B program, which also has other implications. And I would
like you to touch base on that. And then also the issue of
remittances, the fact that women--I believe I saw an article
that staff provided to us. It indicated that overwhelmingly,
women from Indonesia, who are migrating or come up to Europe
have a higher proportion of sending back remittances. And what
impact has that had there? Because sometimes we forget to look
on the ledger what the positive consequences are of that
sending country. And if you could just touch on those items.
And we could start with Dr. Orozco.
Mr. Orozco. Thank you. I think in Western Europe, there is
a process right now of experimentation by trial and error on
migration policy. And Spain has focused, for example, on a
particular experience with bilateral migration relationships
with Ecuador.
And there, they have the belief, more than the knowledge
and the facts, that there is going to be a process of circular
migration that will be short term-based, where migrants will
come to Spain, and then they will go back. And they figured
that one way to do that is by establishing a type of
specialized agreement.
I think the evidence shows that the situation is more
relative. Migrants in general, regardless of where you're from
and where you're going, live on their, what we call, the
illusion of impermanence. We all, once you leave your country,
you say you're going back tomorrow. But circumstances
definitely change those dynamics, those expectations. And as
Susan said, you know, if you have family, you are less likely
to return back home.
The Western Europe countries are focusing a lot on this
issue of circular migration. And they believe that this is, you
know, the equivalence of a guest worker program European style;
may have positive implications. And I think it will have
positive effects among some, especially developing countries in
Europe. But it will also have adverse effects on other migrants
that are in high demand--for example, Asians and Africans--but
are less prepared for other reasons than migration itself.
Race is one of them. There is definitely not an open, but a
passive preference for, Hispanic migrants, and migrants from
Latin America than migrants from Africa. We cannot neglect
those issues.
When it comes to remittance and gender, there is definitely
the case that, depending on where women enter into the labor
force, they will be more likely to remit more or less money.
For example, Asian women working in the hospitality industry,
either as caretakers or in the entertainment industry, are
going to be of a higher percentage.
An example is the Dominican women in Switzerland. There are
about 60,000 Dominicans in Switzerland. Three-quarters of them
are females. And, you know, we don't like to talk about what
they do, because you come with normative moral value judgment.
But the fact of the matter is that they are there responding to
a lower market of entertainment. Many Swiss tourists came to
the Dominican Republic. They fell in love with the women. And
then we have 60,000 women there.
So in that case, you see higher percent of women remitting.
But in other places--for example, we'll see it in the
Netherlands--African women, Ghanaians, remit less than their
male counterparts. And that's because their access to
employment is lower. They are on welfare. The welfare state
inhibits you from remitting, because you have lower earnings.
So there are variations depending on where you are.
Ms. Martin. If I could add, I'm personally very skeptical
of large-scale temporary work programs as a solution for a
number of reasons. When people are admitted for a temporary
purpose into a permanent job, it usually doesn't work. The
employer wants the person to remain, once they're trained and
operating well. The migrant begins to develop equities, want to
stay within the country, develop ties, things of that sort.
I think very targeted programs, seasonal programs, can
work, because the term of employment is short-term. The type of
employment which has a particular cycle--you know, an 18-month
development cycle for a product might work on that. But when
you start to rely on temporary worker programs to deal with
permanent shortages in your labor market, I think you're in for
a recipe for disaster.
To me, what has been the best thing about American
immigration over the years is that we have tended to admit
people for permanent residence with the idea that they're going
to become members of our society. That expectation historically
has been from the start. Historically, that a quarter have
returned home. That happens. It's their choice. And sometimes
it's because they've succeeded. Sometimes it's because they
failed on that.
But we organized our immigration program, or we have in the
past, around integration of immigrants, around the expectation
that they will stay and become Americans. I think we're moving
off of that paradigm. I think the high level of intolerance for
illegal migration is undermining that concept. And I think that
too great a reliance on temporary worker programs, when people
eventually stay in large numbers, means that you're delaying
the process of integration. And I think for us as a country,
there are some real dangers in doing that.
Ms. Solis. I know we didn't touch too much on it. But I
know in, for example, Latin America, there are groups here in
the states that will send monies back to, say, Mexico or
different parts of Latin America. And they set up different
programs for health care, for acquisition of property or
capital outlay. They purchase buildings and build hospitals and
clinics.
And I'd like to know what pattern there is in the OSCE
states that participate or countries, and if you could
elaborate on that.
Mr. Orozco. Yes. These are basically the nations that
migrants make when they are abroad as an organized group. We
call them hometown associations. And they vary from different
type of nature. They might be professional-based groups,
construction-based associations, for example. In Kurdistan,
there are groups of Kurds, construction workers that basically
try to collect some money to help the local community which
they come from.
But the pattern is similar to Latin America. I think it's
less as developed as it is here, partly because here they're
seeing more of a longer process. Migration from CIS countries
to Russia is relatively new. It's not long-standing.
On the other hand, if you look at Armenia, for example, you
do have a large number of associations in Los Angeles, for
example. There's a large Armenian community that is organized,
not as much as we think it is. But they are raising funds.
Predominantly they work on church-related activities, not on
other type of development-related philanthropy.
So they exist, and they can be a source of leveraging for
cooperation. But I think the most important one is the family-
to-family money transfers. That's where the billions of dollars
go to.
Ms. Martin. Could I add one thing on that? One of the areas
where I think the E.U. is a bit ahead of us, in thinking about
this connection between migration and development, are policies
that they refer to as co-development, where their development
agencies work with migrant associations and in trying to do
what Manuel was talking about in his testimony--of trying to
integrate migration more into development and planning.
They don't do it very well yet. I'm not saying that it's
necessarily a perfect system. But I would certainly like to see
some type of migration impact statement in all development
planning and programming, so that we look at both sides of the
development-migration connection. Is the development program
dealing with the migration pressures? And is the migration of
people being taken into account in how our development programs
are being implemented. And their hometown associations, I
think, do play a role.
Ms. Moore. Well, thank you so much, Mr. President.
This has been a very fascinating discussion. And my brain
has been sort of buzzing, because I can't decide whether
migration is a good thing or a bad thing. I mean, it seems to
be the perils in migration for children. Some of the materials
and testimony we've had sort of indicate that when children
migrate with women, there are problems with educational
opportunity often. Street children--we didn't talk about that
specifically. But at the same time, there are remittances that
places like Moldova are very, very dependent upon.
I have a lot of questions. But I don't want to hog all the
time. But I'm going to start with Dr. Orozco.
Dr. Orozco, you've done a lot of work in your studies on
remittances. And so I wanted to know, particularly since
women--the migration patterns for women, tend to be East Asia,
the Pacific, Europe, and Central Asia and Latin America,
perhaps there are a lot of Muslim women who are migrating. I'm
wondering how have our post-9/11 anti-money-laundering
restrictions--what impact that's had on migrants to remit
money.
Mr. Orozco. Thank you. You know, we work on migration all
the time. And we struggle with the issue--the normative aspect
of whether migration is good and bad. And we are right at the
conclusion that we must look at it from a policy perspective,
and a normative perspective. And my analogy is to ask the
question whether commuting is good or bad for families and
societies. And commuting is a form of migration. You have this
mobilization of people through outside of urban areas, for
example.
But on the issue of 9/11, I think it has posed a number of
challenges, especially for money transfer companies; because
the regulatory environment has been more strict on
international foreign currency payments, in a way that the
banking institutions, that's all the accounts for money
transfers to operate on the back-end process have received
sometimes not mixed signals, but strong signals from the U.S.
government saying that money transfers are to be considered
high-risk.
And then if you look at the place where the high risk is
located, it's in places, in countries, where there is an
ideological U.S. foreign policy component. So you are likely
to, for example, scrutinize more the behavior of the Pakistani
and Afghani person permitting than a Somali. I mean, the
Somalian case that is a sad case of so much discrimination to a
large extent of Somalians in the U.S. trying to remit formally
through Western Union, for example, is not allowed.
Ms. Moore. What about in the OSCE area?
Mr. Orozco. The OSCE area, the patterning of the risk layer
is not as high as it is here. On the other hand, even though
I'm critical of the U.S. government issuing risk, I think in
this country, anti-money-laundering regulatory environments are
very primitive, very poor. And compliance doesn't exist.
For example, many of these countries don't even have laws
for anti-money laundering. If you talk to the banks paying
remittances, they have no idea how to identify what constitutes
a suspicious activity. They tell you well, it is under $3,000.
We flag the transaction. But you can buy an AK-47 for $50.
Ms. Moore. Yes.
Mr. Orozco. So it's an issue that you have to look at
outside of whether it is Muslim or not descended, because that
actually can bias your perspective. That can be Manuel Orozco
sending remittances from Moscow. I mean, I can be doing some
criminal activity and not flag. So that issue is important to
look into. It pertains to gender. The reality is that, if there
are restrictions, women will be as likely as men to resort to
informal networks. And informal networks are strong in all of
these regions, partly because the infrastructure is poor,
because also the regulatory environment only allows banks to
pay remittances.
And for a country like Azerbaijan--60 percent of the
country is poor and rural. And you only have banks that do not
go to rural areas. Same thing with Moldova: a very good banking
system, but the savings and investing associations that operate
in Moldova in rural areas do not have the possibility to pay
from it. So that encourages informality. And that's an issue
that we need to pay attention.
Ms. Moore. Just to follow up with one more question, Mr.
Chairman.
I'm looking at a data from the World Bank research
programs. And I just am amazed by their research about the
migration flows, Dr. Martin and Dr. Orozco. It says the gender
composition of migration flows to the main destination
countries in the north. And they differ by region. Flows from
Africa, South Asia and the Middle East tend to be male, while
flows from East Asia and the Pacific, Europe, Central Asia and
Latin America and the Caribbean tend to be female.
Do we know why that is? And where are they going? It didn't
really say where they were going. But do we know why that is?
Ms. Martin. Usually migration occurs through family and
labor recruiter networks. And employment is gendered. So if you
have organizations that are recruiting workers for construction
and bringing them to Germany, when Berlin was being
reconstructed, they're going to be male. And likely, they're
going to be looking for where those migration patterns are.
On the other hand, if you're looking for domestic workers
or looking for nurses, you're going to go to the Philippines.
And it's going to be female. So in the Philippines, 70 percent
of those who migrate from the Philippines are female.
Much of the migration now, unfortunately, is illegal. And
so it's more likely to be men who will initially take that risk
in terms of migration. Even across the border with Mexico, if
you look at apprehension figures, those who cross between ports
of entry, through the desert or the mountains, are
overwhelmingly male. Those who try to use fraudulent documents
coming through ports of entry are predominantly female.
So you do get variations even from the same country in
terms of what type of work they're coming for; but also what
the possible modes of migration are.
Ms. Moore. Just in terms of the United States, there seems
to be some suggestion that male migrants to the United States
are more successful in labor force participation and
integration than females are; and that there are more
catastrophic problems for women who come to the United States.
Ms. Martin. I would certainly not characterize it in that
way. I think because a lot of our migration is initially still
male migration coming in because there are needs in the job
market, the men may tend to have higher employment rates and
higher labor participation rates. They're actually higher in
many cases than natives are.
The women are still more likely to be following to join
often coming from countries where there isn't a high level of
female labor force participation. And so their labor force
rates are going to be lower. Actually once in the labor force,
very often their employment rates are higher than men, because
they're able to get jobs. But the chances are they're not going
to look for them unless it's absolutely essential in terms of
the family household strategy. So I don't think that female
migration poses an economic harm to the United States.
Mr. Hastings. Thank you, all. Dr. Martin and Dr. Orozco,
thank you very much for your emphasizing the particularly
complex issue in the OSCE's sphere as well as more directly
related to our country. Regrettably, this institution deals
with the societal emotions. And the manifestation of that comes
out in a way that I think causes us not to be able to do the
things that are vital in policy that we should be doing. And I
appreciate very much that both of you have given us some policy
direction that is valuable.
I don't have a question. But I would only add one or two
anecdotes. And then I'll say to you, Dr. Orozco that I listened
very carefully, as I did to Dr. Martin and my colleagues. And I
find it interesting that you got through this whole one hour
and a half without saying Kosovo or Bosnia.
And when you speak in terms of Central Asia, you did point
to, and it's correct, where we have some direct policy
relationships and/or diplomatic relationships, we tend to
highlight and gather data and publicize that data. But there
are two countries in Central Asia that have the exact same
migration issues that their neighbors do--Uzbekistan and
Turkmenistan. And they are all, in many respects interrelated,
because the transient points, the transmigration, all of those
things happen.
One other thing that I regret, but I believe both of you
would know. And that is that our colleague, Chris Smith, the
ranking member of the commission, couldn't be with us. Like Ms.
Solis, I'm really proud of the fact that, in the parliamentary
assembly, she is my special representative on migration. And
Congressman Smith is the special representative on human
trafficking and has spent a substantial amount of his time and
career in dealing with that subject and does have a wealth of
information. And I just would point to that.
Another thing is both of you got through this without
saying Canada. And here again, you know, when we focus about
migration and immigration into the United States part of the
OSCE sphere, we tend to leave our northern neighbors off to the
side, who have an immensely complex immigration and migration
and border security issues of similar import to our own.
Many of the remedies that you offer should, and rightly
are, based in world organizations--the WTO, the World Bank, the
United Nations and all of those areas. Unfortunately, what
doesn't happen in something this complex is it cannot be
reduced to a bumper sticker. And it's hard to put it in one or
two pages. And once you get the kind of data that you all have
collected in your careers, regrettably, even when it is sent to
our offices, even when we have immense staff and diverse staff
and staff who are directly interested, it becomes absolutely
too much information for us to digest and to come forward with
meaningful policy.
If we do not, the level of intolerance that is developing
in the OSCE sphere and in the United States of America
specifically is going to have a devastating impact on us.
One anecdote that substantiates what you said, Dr. Martin,
about temporary employment circumstance: We find businesses,
multi-national corporations, U.S. corporations, specifically
interested in H1-B visas and bringing in highly skilled and
technical work. An example took place in the congressional
district that I serve. The Florida Atlantic University in Boca
Raton participated in bringing 19 math teachers from the Asian
continent to St. Lucie and Martin Counties to teach an
underserved area. One of the things that needs to happen is we
need to get on the same page in many of these instances but
certainly the coordination of federal agencies.
On a given day, the homeland security people just decided
they were going to pick up all 19 of those people. And it was
in the middle of the school year. As a matter of fact, it was
two months ago. They were going to pick them up and send them
home. I read about it in the newspaper. And so I got my office
involved and the people at Florida Atlantic University. And of
course, over time, the exception was made.
But just think about the impact of that. Here we have the
19 math teachers. Obviously, we don't have enough math
teachers. I might add every last one of them was extremely
popular with the students and doing extraordinary work and what
have you. All of them had been vetted--no relationship to
terrorism or anything like that. And yet, they were talking
about sending them home.
So we need to be very careful. And you all have so much
information. I hope my colleagues way beyond the commission,
but in the other committee will spend that kind of time. And
I'm especially indebted to Ms. Solis for her extra effort. And
even though we didn't have a large attendance, we did have a
large attendance of members. And it manifests their interest.
And that's largely attributable to the extraordinary work she
did in recruiting them to come here for this important hearing.
One other thing that I've complained about, the commission
itself is not a congressional committee. So matters like the
Congress Daily and the Congressional Quarterly and The Hill and
Roll Call, they will report the hearings that we have that are
important like this.
But I happened to note yesterday, of all the things I read,
I turned to the Congressional Quarterly. And I was interested.
And Fred and others on the staff will know that I reached out
to the editors and told them we have some pretty significant
hearings over here. And a lot of folks would like to know what
we are doing.
But I picked up the Congressional Quarterly and, without
going through the front of it, I just turned. I said I'll bet
you it's in here, but it's in the back. It's the back page. OK?
So that's how important some others attach not only to this
hearing, but others that we have had as well.
What you've had to say here today in this limited period of
time is something that would be very beneficial if the 435
policy makers and the five delegates that I work with and
certainly everybody in the United States Senate--if they were
to hear it and understand how you approach it with the calm,
professional, empirical backup of the things you're saying,
then we'd get rid of some of the myth, we get rid of some of
the anecdotal information that is exclusive only to that
individual and not to the masses, we'd get rid of some of the
stereotypes. And guess what? We might fool around and get
ourselves some kind of comprehensive immigration policy. Thank
you, all, so very much.
Ms. Martin. Thank you.
Mr. Orozco. Thank you.
This is an official publication of the
Commission on Security and
Cooperation in Europe.
< < <
This publication is intended to document
developments and trends in participating
States of the Organization for Security
and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).
< < <
All Commission publications may be freely
reproduced, in any form, with appropriate
credit. The Commission encourages
the widest possible dissemination
of its publications.
< < <
http://www.csce.gov @HelsinkiComm
The Commission's Web site provides
access to the latest press releases
and reports, as well as hearings and
briefings. Using the Commission's electronic
subscription service, readers are able
to receive press releases, articles,
and other materials by topic or countries
of particular interest.
Please subscribe today.